Could someone please provide a list of sites or publications that have done side-by-side comparisons of Canon's 18mp sensor to the sensors being used in Nikon's new generation of crop-frame cameras.

There seem to be a lot of drama queens here who pontificate on how much better the new generation of Nkons are, but when I've looked at sample images, I either see no discernible difference or, at higher ISOs, a little bit better performance from Canon.

A handful of individuals on this site keep trashing the performance of the 18mp sensor and others are repeating it as fact. Since this is a site adored by gearheads, how about some objective third-party comparisons?

The primary issue is the fact that the Canon implementation does not produce the same dynamic range as the latest Nikons as a result of increased “read-out” noise at low ISO. Most of this argument is stimulated by the DxO test results for dynamic range which you can find on their site. In addition, as one guy has pointed out, this noise tends to manifest patterns that the Nikon gear does not have. Whether this matters to you or not, depends on what you need to do with the camera. If the nature of what you shoot and your PP workflow requires that you consistently lift shadows a couple stops, then you may run into this issue, otherwise it is probably no big deal.

The way I look at it, the Canon gear as presently implemented, does not offer the same latitude for exposure correction as some of the later Nikon stuff does. You can search the web for Canon 5DII banding for example and you will see a lot of examples. You need to decide if this is a problem or not in your opinion, related to your own photography. I have sort of a funny perspective on it which is that IMO anyway, most of the examples show what you can do if you use the Canon gear incorrectly. In almost every case where a comparison is given, if the Canon gear were used properly the same image could be made with both. Now for the artsy fartsy part: IMO, in most cases, the image wasn’t worth making in the first place it is nothing more than an example of what happens if you push the canon into the region where it doesn’t work well. Basically, “doc… it hurts when I do this” to which the doc replies, “don’t do that”. Unfortunately there are some cases where you have to “do that” in which case… for now anyway, go buy a Nikon.

Very well said. Let us not get back into analysing shots of sheds with white sides facing the sun and having dark insides...

Pay close attention to the new sensor in the Canon EOS SL1 as far as performance goes. We’re told this sensor will appear in the EOS 70D, but not the EOS 7D Mark II.

Ok, Canon has just mutilated the potential of the 70D to sell well.

LOL.. if canon has proved one thing over and over again it is that they can sell even old bread well.

what people on this forum think has absolutely no influence on the mass market.actually it´s sad because i too would like to see canon make more progess on image quality.

not that canon cameras make bad quality images.. just that IQ has not much improved over the last years.

Correction: Canon's IQ hasn't changed or improved over the last years for anything besides those moving from the 1D series to the 1DX. Nikon, Sony, Pentax, are all delivering new sensors with better performance.

What is Canon doing?

Nothing. What a joke of a company.

They make nearly a $1 billion in operating profit. Hardly call that a joke. Keep in mind that most purchasers of the low end cameras want very basic functions (I doubt many even shoot in raw) so current technology is good enough for them

Hi, Totally agree... many people are happy with the image taken from their mobile, so image from any Canon entry level DSLR will be wow to them. IMHO, the selling point of Canon DSLR is easy to use and that will make a big different when choosing their first DSLR.

Have a nice day.

+1

the XXD line market is targeted towards basically the same market as the rebel - only difference is the XXD targets first time DSLR buyers with a little more disposable income

But that is exactly the reason that has most people on this forum up in arms, they AREN'T keeping up with advancements in new technology, they are simply rereleasing the same camera over and over again in different configurations. The average consumer may not notice or even care, but we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans do!

Fine. But, 'we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans' make up an infinitesimal fraction of their market. The vast majority of dSLR buyers are 'average consumers'.

Yup! when the vast majority of the people buying this body will not know what an AF point is, much less how to manipulate them, or know what a cross type point is you don't have to innovate too much...

Hate to say it, but the XXd line and the rebel line would benefit more from instagram filters than an updated sensor...

Ask yourself this: have you ever been able to walk through a gallery and point out which camera shot which photo? If the stuff was as bad as some of these idiots claim, nobody would use it.

Most of the time you don't need to because it is written underneath the artwork.

?? what gallery are you going too? Most of the art showings I have seen show the title of the piece, the name of the artist and maybe a little desciption ---- location of the shot, etc....I have never seen an artist present their work and proclaim brand awareness...they are promoting their own brand as an artist.

And on the other level, you go to a bridal show you show off your prints...your work. You talk to potential clients and what you talk about is you...what can you do, what you bring to the table creatively --- not I shoot on this brand...the most I ever bring up about my gear is that "I can shoot in any lighting condition," or, "I can shoot in silent mode during the ceremony so I won't be too loud." Never once has a client or a potential client asked what brand I shoot with. I only get that from other photographers or photo enthusiasts.

But that is exactly the reason that has most people on this forum up in arms, they AREN'T keeping up with advancements in new technology, they are simply rereleasing the same camera over and over again in different configurations. The average consumer may not notice or even care, but we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans do!

Fine. But, 'we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans' make up an infinitesimal fraction of their market. The vast majority of dSLR buyers are 'average consumers'.

Yup! when the vast majority of the people buying this body will not know what an AF point is, much less how to manipulate them, or know what a cross type point is you don't have to innovate too much...

Hate to say it, but the XXd line and the rebel line would benefit more from instagram filters than an updated sensor...

I must disagree with this condescending attitude. I think most DLSR buyers are buying the cameras because, for a variety of reasons, they are not satisfied with the quality of images they are getting from their iPhones, their fixed lens compacts or their point and shoots.

Rebel buyers are very likely to be price-limited, but that does not make them stupid or incompetent. They may be new to DSLRs, but there is something about the format that they find desirable. Traditionally, this has been the ability to change lenses, but there can be other factors, such as the larger sensor size, sharper lenses, viewfinder, etc., etc.

It would be a major mistake for any company to treat their customers as stupid and Canon hasn't become the industry leader by making mistakes.

Here is something that people just have a hard time accepting: Canon's 18mp sensor is very good. It is more than adequate for 99.9% of shooting conditions. Can it be improved? Of course. Will it be improved? Of course. But, even 3 1/2 years after introduction, it can hold it's own against the latest sensors used by Nikon. It is not that Rebel or XXD users are inept and therefore can be sold inferior goods. It's that the product is only inferior in the minds of a handful of people who get their jollies from looking for insignificant flaws.

But that is exactly the reason that has most people on this forum up in arms, they AREN'T keeping up with advancements in new technology, they are simply rereleasing the same camera over and over again in different configurations. The average consumer may not notice or even care, but we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans do!

Fine. But, 'we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans' make up an infinitesimal fraction of their market. The vast majority of dSLR buyers are 'average consumers'.

And last week one of them came to me for advice on which camera to buy, saying all their friends had Canon. My recommendation? Nikon, followed by showing him DxO's evaluation of the Canon vs Nikon cameras and telling him to visit some stores and try them both. He bought Nikon. I just can't in all honesty recommend Canon DSLRs to anyone.

There was a thread dedicated to this here in CR last week. Turns out even DXO, when they connect the lens to the camera and evaluate the "system" are seeing that Canon and Nikon are a lot closer than it would appear. Roger/lensrentals found something similar when selecting his camera.

But that is exactly the reason that has most people on this forum up in arms, they AREN'T keeping up with advancements in new technology, they are simply rereleasing the same camera over and over again in different configurations. The average consumer may not notice or even care, but we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans do!

Fine. But, 'we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans' make up an infinitesimal fraction of their market. The vast majority of dSLR buyers are 'average consumers'.

Now imagine what would happen if we "infinitesimal fraction of the market" stopped supporting Canon. Marketshare is directly related to mindshare. It doesn't matter what the actual facts are, only what people perceive are the facts (Marketing 101). Ask Apple about the Final Cut Pro X fiasco. When enough pros (who equally represented a small portion of Apple's market share) bashed the new editing software, everyone else abandoned it as well as they assumed the pros must know what they are talking about. Canon like any other company need professionals to shoot great images with their gear to market the possibilities to non-professionals. If enough pros start complaining, even those not knowledgable about it will start to echo those complaints creating a snowball affect.

But that is exactly the reason that has most people on this forum up in arms, they AREN'T keeping up with advancements in new technology, they are simply rereleasing the same camera over and over again in different configurations. The average consumer may not notice or even care, but we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans do!

Fine. But, 'we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans' make up an infinitesimal fraction of their market. The vast majority of dSLR buyers are 'average consumers'.

Yup! when the vast majority of the people buying this body will not know what an AF point is, much less how to manipulate them, or know what a cross type point is you don't have to innovate too much...

Hate to say it, but the XXd line and the rebel line would benefit more from instagram filters than an updated sensor...

I must disagree with this condescending attitude. I think most DLSR buyers are buying the cameras because, for a variety of reasons, they are not satisfied with the quality of images they are getting from their iPhones, their fixed lens compacts or their point and shoots.

Rebel buyers are very likely to be price-limited, but that does not make them stupid or incompetent. They may be new to DSLRs, but there is something about the format that they find desirable. Traditionally, this has been the ability to change lenses, but there can be other factors, such as the larger sensor size, sharper lenses, viewfinder, etc., etc.

It would be a major mistake for any company to treat their customers as stupid and Canon hasn't become the industry leader by making mistakes.

Here is something that people just have a hard time accepting: Canon's 18mp sensor is very good. It is more than adequate for 99.9% of shooting conditions. Can it be improved? Of course. Will it be improved? Of course. But, even 3 1/2 years after introduction, it can hold it's own against the latest sensors used by Nikon. It is not that Rebel or XXD users are inept and therefore can be sold inferior goods. It's that the product is only inferior in the minds of a handful of people who get their jollies from looking for insignificant flaws.

it's not condescending. It's the reality of the market. I can count way more times someone with their brand new (fill in the blank between $500-1500) camera comes up to me and asks me...just gott his...how do i...

I take a look and notice that more times than not ---all AF points are still selected, and the camera is in green auto everything mode. If they are on a canon, I generally show them...this is how you do X, and this is how you do Y, and this is how you set Z...at some point while telling them this I ask them if they read their manual, and they say no - and it's really surprising how many of them do not even know where their manual is!

I had a cousin of my fiancee call me asking for advice...her choice was between a sony and a canon t series...I recommended the canon and she bought the sony...over christmas she was visiting and guess what she asks me...how do I do anything on this...the sony UI is like foreign language..I deciphered a few things and hated the controls...when asked where is the manual...she said she lost it...I told her to DL the manual and that will explain a lot.

LOL... If i did not run into that situation as much as I did, I would not state what I stated.

Do you really want to see what happens when you go from a 20 or 22 megapixel sensor to a 46 megapixel sensor? Do you want to see how the lens affects sensor sharpness? Take your lens, mount it on your FF camera, take a photo that shows off sharpness. Then take that lens, mount it on a Rebel, and do the same. You will find that only lenses of superior sharpness will give you a sharp image on your Rebel...... and that is what will happen when you go full frame high megapixel....

Unless you have a camera bag full of the finest L-glass, you can rant on and on about which sensor and which camera outresolves who..... but out in the real world most people have bought into a SYSTEM.... and by far the most important part and the most expensive part of that system is the glass....

You can take the crappiest Nikon DSLR, put a high end lens on it, and it will outresolve the finest Canon camera with a kit lens. Likewise, take the crappiest Canon, put on some high end L-glass, and it will outresolve the finest Nikon with a kit lens.

You want to know the order of things? #1 - photographer#2 - glass#3 - camera

..... and the glass is an investment while the camera can be best thought of as expendable.

Sorry for the rant, but this thread has degenerated into another DXO/SENSOR/NIKON/CANON arguefest, most of which has nothing to do with the topic at hand..

Do you really want to see what happens when you go from a 20 or 22 megapixel sensor to a 46 megapixel sensor? Do you want to see how the lens affects sensor sharpness? Take your lens, mount it on your FF camera, take a photo that shows off sharpness. Then take that lens, mount it on a Rebel, and do the same. You will find that only lenses of superior sharpness will give you a sharp image on your Rebel...... and that is what will happen when you go full frame high megapixel....

Unless you have a camera bag full of the finest L-glass, you can rant on and on about which sensor and which camera outresolves who..... but out in the real world most people have bought into a SYSTEM.... and by far the most important part and the most expensive part of that system is the glass....

You can take the crappiest Nikon DSLR, put a high end lens on it, and it will outresolve the finest Canon camera with a kit lens. Likewise, take the crappiest Canon, put on some high end L-glass, and it will outresolve the finest Nikon with a kit lens.

You want to know the order of things? #1 - photographer#2 - glass#3 - camera

..... and the glass is an investment while the camera can be best thought of as expendable.

Sorry for the rant, but this thread has degenerated into another DXO/SENSOR/NIKON/CANON arguefest, most of which has nothing to do with the topic at hand..

Perceptual MPix: a much simpler tool to score and compare lensesP-Mpix is the unit of a sharpness measurement. The number of P-Mpix of a camera/lens combination is equal to the pixel count of a sensor that would give the same sharpness if tested with a perfect theoretical optics, as the camera/lens combination under test.For example, if a camera with a sensor of 24Mpix when used with a given lens has a P-Mpix of 18MPix, it means that somewhere in the optical system 6Mpix are lost, in the sense that as an observer you will not perceive the additional sharpness that these 6Mpix should have added to the photos if everything was perfect.

So, by DxO's criteria and definition, Canon's best prime and zoom lens are basically not limiting system resolution (within a 1 MP margin of error). However, Nikon's best prime and zoom on the D800 are resulting in the 'loss' of 14-15 MP....resulting in a perceived sharpness of even Nikon's best lenses on the D800 as no better than Canon's best lenses.

Interestingly, while the D800 appears to be 'too much' for Nikon lenses in that the lenses are clearly limiting overall system resolution, we don't know from these data if we're at the limit of the Canon lenses.